memory_alphafandomcom-20200223-history
User talk:Archduk3/Archive 13
Recent split offs Hey. Following your split off from the article Unnamed USS Enterprise (NCC-1701) personnel several images are unused. Please add them to the appropriate new articles. Thanks. Tom (talk) 22:34, January 26, 2013 (UTC) :Just a FYI, I am working on this when I can. Sorry it's taking so long. - 17:34, February 21, 2013 (UTC) Block Thanks, had a hiccup there or I would have finished it- I upped it to two weeks since it was their third block(the first was 3 days, the second a week). 31dot (talk) 01:06, February 9, 2013 (UTC) :That's cool, it seems I was right behind you on this one overall, since I hadn't even started to revert the changes when I blocked the ip addresss, only to find out that you were doing that at the same time. :) - 01:14, February 9, 2013 (UTC) Images I'll pass that up the food chain. Edit: I also wanted to point out that I only added the new images; the article itself has been here for a while. Just don't want others to lose the contributions they made. Raylan13 (talk) 06:38, March 1, 2013 (UTC) First time editor please !H!E!L!P! looks like some one moved my images (I'm cool with that I really did't know where to put it) its at the < - bottom of the M-113 box from the bottom link. The problem is whats the point of a panoramic image (Just when you want to view it alone) the res is so low that now its not panoramic its just a medium res'd imaged cropped in half, It should be 2568x881. This Makes all the time i took negated completely. M-113 Image Is the source given here an acceptable source for an image? I don't know a lot about it but it seems odd to me. 31dot (talk) 10:24, April 1, 2013 (UTC) :Flickr is an acceptable source, as long as the licensing on the image allows, but those images must be marked with the flickr license template. -- sulfur (talk) 12:19, April 1, 2013 (UTC) :Furthermore, the original image is not marked as CC, but as "All Rights Reserved". Permission was given strictly to Wikipedia for use, so to actually use that image, we'll have to ensure that all checks/etc are covered off. -- sulfur (talk) 12:21, April 1, 2013 (UTC) ::Sulfur, have you already contact the flickr user on this, as it's my understanding we need his permission to use this, or should I? - 19:48, April 1, 2013 (UTC) :I've not contacted them -- I just gave the various images and such a quick glance-over. -- sulfur (talk) 19:54, April 1, 2013 (UTC) ::Email sent, I'll update when I get a response. - 20:20, April 1, 2013 (UTC) Removing edits from history Please do not remove edits from the history of pages unless they are vandalism or copyright violations. The Star Trek video game page history contained neither of these. Furthermore, Wikia was not creating content here, they were sharing content here. Please pay attention to discussions that took place before calling things "copyright violations". This was not the case here. -- sulfur (talk) 10:50, April 2, 2013 (UTC) :I did pay attention, or at least I did for all the parts of it that happened on site. It's impossible for wikia employees to make contributions here (creating content) that don't lead to commercial use of that work. All contributions here have to be non-commercial, and wikia's marketing team dumping a bunch of images on a page to increase the traffic so the ads sell for more is the very definition of using the work for commercial purposes. If they want to share content, they can let us know where we can get it, because we have to be the ones that choose to add it, not them. Please pay attention to the terms of the CC license before calling violations of the copyright anything less than such, as that was the case here. - 18:03, April 2, 2013 (UTC) I know the CC license. The edits to the video game page in no way contravened it. At all. Dumping ~20 images? Yes. A problem. Wikia knows about it now. Giving us a few images? Not an issue, as long as they are licensed properly. Those images were all over the web, and us using 2-3 of them would be fine. Regardless, there was never a copyright violating edit to the article. There was issue with the plethora of images uploaded, but simply linking to them is not a copyright violation. -- sulfur (talk) 18:43, April 2, 2013 (UTC) :How exactly were those edits non-commercial when they were made by an employee of the company that makes a profit on the traffic to that page, and presumably would have lead to increased traffic, and thus more profit? They can host MA and run ads, or they can contribute to MA and not run ads; they can't do both. - 18:56, April 2, 2013 (UTC) The edit to the page is still not a copyright violation. The image uploads may have been. Short answer: In future, before deleting edit history like that, please talk to other people. -- sulfur (talk) 19:28, April 2, 2013 (UTC) Videos Was the entire video module reactivated, or did some user simply upload a large number of videos to the wiki? If the latter, then I'm not sure that it's a Wikia problem rather than a user problem. Can you confirm before I submit the specific inquiry? -- sulfur (talk) 02:12, April 17, 2013 (UTC) :It was my understanding that was suppose to be disabled, as we didn't want any videos at all. I haven't seen the video rail module, but the video link in the nav should still be removed. - 02:19, April 17, 2013 (UTC) I'm not sure that the can be removed. It also looks like he simply took advantage of the default mediawiki upload to link to the videos of the entire episodes from hulu (which are free for a period of time, but not guaranteed to be free in an ongoing situation). When mediawiki sees such uploads, it "creates videos" for them, though they're not actually hosted here/etc. In this case, it appears to be a user problem. Perhaps we need to clarify the MA:IMAGE and MA:NOT a bit more. -- :I was wondering how someone had downloaded a hulu video, since I have plus and even I can't do that. Regardless, if we don't already actually say we don't want videos on one of both of those pages, then we should add it for sure. As for the video upload page, I seem to remember a time where you couldn't upload a video because the special page was disabled. That was most likely several "upgrades" ago, but I was under the impression that since videos were going to remain off here completely, you still couldn't, which makes me wonder what would happen if someone tried to upload a video "for real", which is bound to happen eventually so long as the default menu options on every page contain a video upload link. - 18:09, April 18, 2013 (UTC) Want to be in our Star Trek Expert Showcase? Hi, I'm Brian with Wikia. I wanted to invite you to participate in our upcoming Star Trek episode of Wikia's Expert Showcase. We'd record it on a Google+ Hangout some time next week. Could you drop me a line AS SOON AS POSSIBLE and let me know either way, please? We'd love to feature you, but are on a deadline. My email is brian@wikia-inc.com. Thanks! -- 23:21, May 1, 2013 (UTC) :No. - 03:07, May 2, 2013 (UTC) Welcome msg & personal info Hi, there's still one of these "you're not required to provide any personal information at all" at the end of MediaWiki:Welcome-message-anon. --(boxed) (talk) 15:26, May 4, 2013 (UTC) :Good catch. - 15:33, May 4, 2013 (UTC) Copyrights anew Wikia staff can upload images, even with the license we use. As long as those images are properly cited, sourced, etc, and publicly available. They cannot upload publicity images, but if those images are available elsewhere, there's no issue with it. Please do not unilaterally delete these images next tmie, without a mention in advance. -- sulfur (talk) 19:15, May 16, 2013 (UTC) Mbeta Note to self: clean up the rest of the links later today when you're not on a Xbox. - 17:07, May 29, 2013 (UTC) This. - 02:50, May 30, 2013 (UTC) From The Covenant of the Crown onwards. - 09:28, May 31, 2013 (UTC) Hate everything beta now. - 11:21, June 1, 2013 (UTC) My email Hi Archduk3, I wanted to just check in with you here about if you got my email (I used the address attached to this account). The date for the visit is approaching soon, so if you could let me know in a day or so, I would really appreciate it. Thanks, --Sarah 16:58, June 4, 2013 (UTC) :Archduk3: Did you get this email? Are you considering going...? -- sulfur (talk) 12:54, June 6, 2013 (UTC) ::Yes. We'll see how this goes. - 07:46, June 7, 2013 (UTC) :Guess you got home safely too! Haha. :) -- sulfur (talk) 21:03, June 22, 2013 (UTC) ::Yeah, it was just after 12:30am though. I actually found some buttons, but most of them seemed like crap, and by that time I was literally down to just trolly fair and a dollar. Also, walking around Fisherman's Wharf hung over is not recommended. :p - 23:07, June 22, 2013 (UTC) :Aside... nor is getting the airport shuttle at 6am fun when hung over. :) -- sulfur (talk) 23:54, June 22, 2013 (UTC) McCoy on shuttlecraft Hey could do me a favour and change the filename of the image I just put up of McCoy on the shuttlecraft. 'McCoy' is missing a big 'C'.--BorgKnight (talk) 17:21, June 5, 2013 (UTC) :I would prefer if you could upload a .jpg version of that image here (link under the file history box in said tab), since we don't want screenshots as a .png. Also, yes, I can do that if you can't convert the file. - 17:27, June 5, 2013 (UTC) No problem, I'll get a jpg with higher resolution--BorgKnight (talk) 17:37, June 5, 2013 (UTC) Ok I've added a whole new image file with the correct name so if you can could you please delete the previous file I uploaded. Thank you.--BorgKnight (talk) 17:54, June 5, 2013 (UTC) :Done. - 17:56, June 5, 2013 (UTC) So...not 2260? Hey, this isn't really anything major, but I was just wondering if you knew why Star Trek Into Darkness and any related pages have reverted the film's stardate setting to only 2259? I've noticed a lot of the people and things that exist in the alternate reality list to being 'alive' or 'active' as of that year when it was originally 2260. Was it decided that the movie's epilogue no longer officially take places one year after stardate 2259.55? FTR, I know full well that Memory Alpha is likely to be a more accurate, if not the most accurate outlet on Trek lore than any other source, but according to the movie's Wikipedia page, it finishes "one year later". --FaNbOy1988 (talk) 18:39, June 6, 2013 (UTC) :The film ends almost one year later, and since the main events of the film take place in February, it's possible it was still 2259. Without knowing either way for sure, we tend to go with the known date. - 07:45, June 7, 2013 (UTC) Thanks Hey Duke, Thanks for taking care of the Remaster issue, it has made life a lot easier in the editing world, ... and [[TNG-R|... is a marked improvement! Thanks for that.--[[User:Sennim|Sennim (talk) 13:30, June 8, 2013 (UTC) Memory Alpha:Administrators Hi, Please add me to the list of administrators/bureaucrats for Serbian wiki. Also, please add Serbian interlink to Announcements. Interlink is: Успомене Алфе:Обавјештења Igor871 (talk) 00:11, June 9, 2013 (UTC) :Done. - 18:13, June 16, 2013 (UTC) Visit forum notice Can you add a community corner notice about the visit forum when you have a minute? -- sulfur (talk) 13:24, June 25, 2013 (UTC) Thanks. PS... choosing sizes intentionally is better when logged in. ;) -- sulfur (talk) 12:54, June 26, 2013 (UTC) :That was actually part of my testing of the wikia app. I'm planing to send off an email about the issues I've found sometime this week. There are quite a few. - 13:02, June 26, 2013 (UTC) Pass them my way first, we can add some of my things to that list. :) -- sulfur (talk) 13:18, June 26, 2013 (UTC) :Will do. Also, this is me editing from "inside" the app. - 13:24, June 26, 2013 (UTC) Via "web view", or the app proper? -- sulfur (talk) 14:02, June 26, 2013 (UTC) :That was from the web view. Bit of an issue logging in like that, but it went through eventually. I was trying to find a way to get to the main page while still using the app proper. Also, it seems pages outside the main namespace will either default to the web view, or like the special pages, should. - 14:12, June 26, 2013 (UTC) Interesting. I've not played with it sufficiently in depth in that manner, but I did notice that pages don't seem to list categories within the app. Unless I'm missing them somewhere. I also still have issue with the images that are displayed. There needs to be some "tag" to indicate that a picture is the main image on a page. We could hide that right in out templates then to make it easy. -- sulfur (talk) 14:13, June 26, 2013 (UTC) Aside: check this out... -- sulfur (talk) 14:18, June 26, 2013 (UTC) :Star Wars people are so weird. :p Looks like there was a bit of an evolution on the video thing between them and us. That, or they didn't ask for the same level of control we did. :If you're looking for weird image and formatting issues, you should check out the Beta Quadrant page in the app, as the main picture is simply gone (I think because it's an image map) and the text remains italicized after the first bginfo template, which of course doesn't format correctly either. I haven't noticed categories either, but I haven't actually been trying to get to them. :As an aside, I know the promotion text still isn't showing up in the app, but it seems the mobile css still isn't loading for phones either. Wondering if those are linked somehow, or is the latter because theirs comes from an S'''css page? - 14:49, June 26, 2013 (UTC) Followup: Forum:Video policy on MA? -- sulfur (talk) 15:30, June 26, 2013 (UTC) Note: Yes. The search bar wraps again. -- sulfur (talk) 15:32, June 26, 2013 (UTC) :It's not on mine (both firefox and IE) though. I'm just going to assume that you're running a higher version of firefox than I am, since I'm still using XP, so I'm wondering if there is a difference there. - 15:38, June 26, 2013 (UTC) The latest change works fine. I'm on FF 21+. FYI. -- sulfur (talk) 16:02, June 26, 2013 (UTC) MLP Ha. check this out PS... See video policy comments above. -- sulfur (talk) 16:05, June 26, 2013 (UTC) :These guys are on a whole other level than me, but more power to them. I image this must have been what it was like to be that guy with the Spock ears in 1969. - 16:35, June 26, 2013 (UTC) ImageServing tool This might be of interest to you, especially as regards the myWikia app: How images are picked to represent articles. I left a fairly detailed comment at the top, please feel free to respond to it and expand on it if you're able. -- sulfur (talk) 19:00, June 26, 2013 (UTC) Vandaliser There is someone currently vandalizing pages, can you block them? --BorgKnight (talk) 04:05, August 16, 2013 (UTC) :Done. - 04:12, August 16, 2013 (UTC) Dreadnought Apocrypha Removal I undid your removal of the paragraph placed in the Apocrypha section of the Dreadnought class. Firstly you didn't give an explanation for its removal other that 'Really...' and secondly I didn't see anything wrong with it as it covered, liked the other paragraph in the section, a Starfleet class of starship known as Dreadnought. --BorgKnight (talk) 05:37, August 22, 2013 (UTC) Italics bug That's been a bug in core mediawiki for 3+ subversions now. I don't anticipate it being fixed any time soon. -- sulfur (talk) 02:31, August 25, 2013 (UTC) :Well that sucks. Either way, there's no pressing need to fix them then. - 07:42, August 25, 2013 (UTC) Mobile discussion + Darwin Check out my updates to the forum discussion about these things. If there's anything I missed in the mobile portion, please don't hesitate to add it in. -- sulfur (talk) 14:27, August 27, 2013 (UTC) Imagelicensing Is now a straight redirect over to . I'll bot run the cleanup of user talk pages later so that it can be completely removed. -- sulfur (talk) 13:42, August 29, 2013 (UTC) :Cool. I'm thinking we should also have a shortcut for image other/flickr as well, since it seems those would always need to use the bare template. - 17:58, August 29, 2013 (UTC) That could work, something that allows CCL, CCL-SA, or CCL2 as well in that possibly -- sulfur (talk) 18:09, August 29, 2013 (UTC) Popular articles? Can you help me to add Popular Articles which appears when searching something to Serbian version of the Wiki? Just point me to the necessary css/js/template links so I can copy it. Thanks. Igor871 (talk) 16:39, September 4, 2013 (UTC) :If you're talking about the "Top Pages" box on the search results page, that's actually directly from wikia. I expect that it will show up sometime in the next few weeks. - 21:18, September 4, 2013 (UTC) Yes, that's what I meant. Thank you for the information. Igor871 (talk) 22:03, September 4, 2013 (UTC) Image collage FYI, by converting it to use the template directly, you actually broke the usage of the template fairly seriously. The whole point of the prior template was to just be able to give another licensing template shortcut that could be used, rather than having to fill out the license type, rationale, etc etc. I've "fixed" a few of the items calling it, but this is definitely not the way that it should work. It's supposed to be a "shortcut". As such, I'm going to look at it today and try to make it work properly again. -- sulfur (talk) 13:05, September 5, 2013 (UTC) Housekeeping Hey Duke, could you move this image : '''File:The Original Series The Collector's Edition Issue 7 cover.JPG to its proper format?. The capitalized extension slipped by me. Sorry for that--Sennim (talk) 14:07, September 10, 2013 (UTC) MA Test Wiki Hey. I received the "new message" note here on MA. It says I have new messages on the Memory Alpha Test Wiki. Following the link, I cannot log in into this wiki to read the message. Also strange that on this "test wiki" my talk page is completely there but I have no profile page. Any idea how I get rid of this "new message" banner? Thanks. Tom (talk) 21:15, September 10, 2013 (UTC) :The test wiki is a "copy" of the MA database on it, more or less. I had the same issue a few days ago, and I assumed that the notification was because the talk page suddenly existed. I'm not sure why you can't log in though. You could try logging in at any other wikia wiki and then going to the page, since the "logged in here but not elsewhere" problem only effects us and uncyclopedia as far as I know. - 21:23, September 10, 2013 (UTC) TTI Out of curiosity... why the requirement to inline/noicon and not use proper interwiki linking (which has noicon to begin with...) I ask because I used the template as the basis for . -- sulfur (talk) 19:33, September 11, 2013 (UTC) :The templates based on are far more versatile than actually using proper interwiki links, since we won't need another two templates like NCwiki needs and . The only thing that's different between NCwiki and Ex Astris for the user is the need for underscores in the actual link part, which I consider to be a rather small concession to reduce the overall number of templates required. I honestly don't remember why I added the noicon span in there, but I'm sure there was a reason. - 19:41, September 11, 2013 (UTC) I still lean toward using internal linking for other wikis when possible, for simplicity. To be honest, we don't really need NCwiki-title done the way that it's done -- it can (and should) likely be simply a redirect over to NCwiki (just like the magazine templates are done currently). Also, we created the Mbeta template intentionally separate from NCwiki because we wanted it (when used inline) to show up a certain way and be somewhat unique. -- sulfur (talk) 19:46, September 11, 2013 (UTC) :I considered using a mbeta style link for inline citations, but I figured these weren't going to be used like mbeta is, and I couldn't figure out how to simulate something like the numbered citations that would look good (how does one get something like "StarFleet DingBats" on the wiki? :p ). - 19:52, September 11, 2013 (UTC) Total unrelated aside... check this out. -- sulfur (talk) 19:55, September 11, 2013 (UTC) :Yeah, I actually saw that late last night, wasn't sure where to put it on the site, since I'm not sure if that's a parody or a tribute. It feels kinda like both to me. - 20:04, September 11, 2013 (UTC) FYI, now live http://report.wikia.net/classchange/index.php -- sulfur (talk) 19:33, September 13, 2013 (UTC) FYI 2, a bot edit on a talk page doesn't peg off the talk page... -- sulfur (talk) 22:26, September 14, 2013 (UTC) :Yes...and already bookmarked. - 22:53, September 14, 2013 (UTC) Link Fixes I was browsing through the recent activity list, and I see that you did something with my talk page. You wrote, "you get all the lk fxs". I checked the page, wherein I didn't see changes. I am puzzled. Can you please help me to understand your comment? Thanks. Throwback (talk) 11:00, September 15, 2013 (UTC) :That was changing votes for undeletion to the new name . After working on that for awhile, I'm afraid I was getting a little loopy there. It being the middle of the night didn't help either. Sorry about that. - 17:09, September 15, 2013 (UTC) DS9 v TN Note that I was going with a generic thing which is why I included Quark's (mirror). I want to further expand the categorization there, but not entirely clear how to do it as yet, but it'd be nice to have generic establishments at the top level, and specific things below. -- sulfur (talk) 17:26, September 16, 2013 (UTC) :If there are a few establishments on Bajor, we could have a Bajoran system establishments cat that contains the DS9 one. That should solve the naming issue. - 17:56, September 16, 2013 (UTC) That could work... potentially. I'll skim through and see what's there. Later. Meantime -- check skype msgs. -- sulfur (talk) 19:18, September 16, 2013 (UTC) deletion thanks for deleting "Stryker Ortho Lab"; I realised I forgot to suppress that link the moment I've moved the page, but you fixed it before I could even ask someone, which is pretty damn impressive ! -- Capricorn (talk) 18:58, September 16, 2013 (UTC) :I'm omnipresent, what else can I say? ;) - 19:10, September 16, 2013 (UTC) Wizeman What's up with my contribution on physics error? You deleted it even without explaining why! As I remember that kind of facts are present on some Memory Alpha pages.--Wizeman (talk) 02:50, September 17, 2013 (UTC) :It was a poorly worded nitpick, and not "trivia". - 03:02, September 17, 2013 (UTC) Well than, in what section you put such nitpicks? And btw here is some addition to what I've written earlier: Same goes for wild changes of gravity vector inside the ship. Inside free falling ship there must be zero gravity. If ship rotates the centrifugal force can be a substitute, but it should be constant, and directed from axis of rotation, not towards Earth. Actually situation before “the fall” is scientifically more accurate, as two ships and debris around them move with the same speed and affected the same gravity forces — so from crew's point of view it's no difference if they fall or not, as relative movement remains the same. If you also consider this "poorly worded" you can edit this and previous piece yourself. ::We generally do not post nitpicks, per the nitpick policy. A decision was made by the community that such things were not encyclopedic. Now, if you can cite your nitpick with some sort of evidence, such as a statement from someone who worked on the film that it was indeed a nitpick, or other documented source, then we might have something. Other than that, we don't post nitpicks. 31dot (talk) 08:16, September 17, 2013 (UTC) Nope, I haven't seen any statement, it's only my own knowledge of physics from school and simple calculations. In fact, that was the reason, I wrote about Enterprise fall (at 130 km per sec speed) in the first place. To draw attention to such outrageous defiance of real world physics. Still maybe you should reconsider this policy and make at least special pages for nitpicks? So people could at least become aware of such things.--Wizeman (talk) 09:31, September 17, 2013 (UTC) :Your logic is flawed, since it isn't known that gravity must be zero in the Enterprise as it falls, because the ship is most likely equipped with some form of artificial gravity plating and/or an artificial gravity generator. What you consider a problem is simply a lack of understanding and imagination on your part, since anyone who started from the premise that what we saw was internally consistent would have arrived at one of the several simple explanations, such as internal gravity could have been effected as shown by a progressive and/or varying failure of the gravity systems, which take into account all the relevant information. The only thing "outrageous" here was your assumption. - 15:30, September 17, 2013 (UTC) If course gravity is not had to be zero as Enterprise as it falls. It fell towards Earth all the time after falling out of warp. My "outrageous" thing was about sudden change of Enterprise condition in the midst of that fall.--Wizeman (talk) 02:54, September 18, 2013 (UTC) ::Special pages for nitpicks have been proposed and rejected many times; the trouble is that many "nitpicks" aren't really nitpicks; they can be explained away, debated, and many have different opinions on them. That's why we ask for citations from documented sources before even considering posting a "nitpick". There are websites out there that catalog nitpicks if that is your pleasure. 31dot (talk) 18:54, September 17, 2013 (UTC) Then please, give me some links. Or better place them on nitpick page, so noobs like me would know where to look instead of MA --Wizeman (talk) 02:54, September 18, 2013 (UTC) :Memory Alpha does not endorse/link to sites such as that, but a Google search for Star Trek nitpicks will result in what you want within the first few pages. - 20:55, September 18, 2013 (UTC) All results on first few pages in Google search of 'Star Trek nitpicks' are to Memory Alpha!--Wizeman (talk) 02:44, September 19, 2013 (UTC) :I find that hard to believe, and . - 02:46, September 19, 2013 (UTC) Excuse me, but you found only several personal blogs, not websites out there that catalog nitpicks which we were talking about.Btw I haven't find any particular rule on MA, which explicitly forbids links to sites with disputable content.--Wizeman (talk) 07:26, September 19, 2013 (UTC) But then here I have found a guideline Arguments are not constructive. Note, that if there were one or two links to netpicking sites here, our argument would be over at your first reply. And possibly such link could prevent similar situations in the future.--Wizeman (talk) 07:54, September 19, 2013 (UTC) Communicator image? Hi, Archduk3. I see you've been uploading images from . Is there any chance you could please upload an image of the closeup view of the Enterprise communicator? It's in the scene when he drops it, after a security guard on the confronts him. --Defiant (talk) 08:59, October 1, 2013 (UTC) :Are you looking for this? - 13:54, October 1, 2013 (UTC) Yeah. Thanks very much for the link :) --Defiant (talk) 15:26, October 1, 2013 (UTC) New Universe information in Prime Universe Pages/Articles Forum:Combine Prime/Alternate reality articles? There are people adding new Trekverse (nuTrek) information into historic Trekverse (hTrek) articles, it is mounting, and it is becoming very confusing. Trekbuff (talk) 20:55, October 6, 2013 (UTC) :I need examples, some information from the AR films can apply to prime people, places, or things. - 01:19, October 7, 2013 (UTC) Black hole: Only in the AU (nuTrek) can someone go 'through' a black hole and exit with integrity. It's even bad science. Part of the information on that page includes Red matter which is clearly a nuTrek device. I'll post more as I run across them and people bring them to my attention. - Trekbuff (talk) 21:51, October 7, 2013 (UTC) :The mistake you're making is thinking that all information from films 11 and 12 should be segregated, when MA's POV and content policies state otherwise. Spock, red matter, and the Jellyfish, along with the Narada, Nero, and his crew, all come from the prime reality to the alternate reality via a black hole after the destruction of Romulus. , of course, free to believe those events didn't happen, or didn't happen in "historic Trek", but MA covers them. - 22:25, October 7, 2013 (UTC) I'm not claiming those events didn't take place in the new Trek movies or that Spock, Nero, and other particulars were not intended to be from the original timeline, only that there are enough differences, especially in , that it has and is creating numerous consistancy problems. I also challenge that Roberto Orci didn't/doesn't know the difference between a Black hole and a Wormhole. All one need do is view the way the phenomenon was presented in Star Trek (film). I am bringing this to 'your' attention only because I've been running into discussion problems with others presenting reference from the same pages here. I am not being confrontational, only presenting confusion. As I said, when I come across other examples I will bring them to your attention. I have not and will not make such changes on my own. I am aware of MA's POV and content policies. Further thought may need be given them. - Trekbuff (talk) 23:05, October 7, 2013 (UTC) :I'm not sure what you're looking for, since even though we know black holes don't work like film 11 has them working, it was stilled called a black hole, so according to policy we call it that. Memory Alpha endeavors to "not promote any particular view or critical judgment on the various Star Trek related material", so we try not to bash the writers or actors for not being scientists. That said, if you know of any production source stating it should have been a wormhole or even addressing the perceived problem, we can include that information. You could also include a brief background note provided it isn't a nitpick. I'm not sure what issues you are having elsewhere, so I'm not the best person to be addressing this, you are. - 08:47, October 8, 2013 (UTC) ::Maybe this ought to be moved to the forum topic again, since it seems a continuation of it -- Capricorn (talk) 16:41, October 9, 2013 (UTC) ::If I wanted input from the community in general I would have posed my questions in the topic. As it stands, I posed my questions where I trusted the direct response. Trekbuff (talk) 22:23, October 10, 2013 (UTC) Wider format on Memory Alpha? Hi, I just noticed that whole Memory Alpha site got wider, at least on my screen. Is this something you or some other admin did, or is this wikia doing? If the first is the case, please point me how to do it for Serbian version. Thanks. :This is the new "fluid" layout. MA/en is one of the early adopters (for once with a Wikia skin change!). I think that the plan is to roll it out to english wikis first and then move to other languages. The best thing to do is to search for "darwin" or "fluid" on Community Central and go from there. -- sulfur (talk) 22:23, October 15, 2013 (UTC) :: Will do. Thanks! Igor871 (talk) 23:30, October 15, 2013 (UTC) Revert Hey. Just saw your revert of my edit. No explanation for me? Now the appendices section is broken. Tom (talk) 12:21, October 30, 2013 (UTC) :Actually, you reverted me first without explanation, since I was that anon, though I guess I should have taken the time to explain the undo if I had the time to log in. The only three things that should be above a disambiguation are: the articletype template, pna notices and the like, and the sidebar or the first picture (not both). Since there isn't anything visibly wrong using oasis/darwin, I'm going to assume you're using monobook on a computer; it looked fine in monobook on mobile too, but that's pretty small. I've added in the TOC and a clear which should solve the problem you're having. Since darwin is variable width and should/does let you see the format at the smallest and largest widths in previews, conceivably you should notice better article formatting in monobook as a side effect over time. - 21:45, October 30, 2013 (UTC) Category removal Hey -- I know that it's not intentional, but 2-3 of your recent semi-revert edits have removed categories from articles for one reason or another. You may want to double check your category editing prefs, and see if they're at fault. -- sulfur (talk) 14:47, December 17, 2013 (UTC) :I noticed it once myself, but I couldn't tell you why that's happening, as everything seems to be correct in my prefs. Could be iPad related, or have something to do with anons having the category module and logged in users not having it, though I don't remember logging in on the edit screen that many times. - 08:54, December 18, 2013 (UTC) ::Speaking of category removal- I object to your deletion of the Mumbai Packers Movers category; now how am I supposed to find out how to effortlessly move to Mumbai? ;) 31dot (talk) 10:46, December 18, 2013 (UTC) :I'm truly sorry for my shortsighted removal of very important information regarding effortless moving in Mumbai. I can only say that the Moving Packers of Mumbai are far superior to other, similarly named moving and/or packing companies, and your Mumbai move will truly be a delight and pleasure if you choose them for your Mumbai moving needs. Mumbai. ;) - 11:51, December 18, 2013 (UTC) Welcome Hello, thanks for the welcome! I made the edit to the Star Trek Online page, but I forgot to login first lol. Anyway, I love Star Trek and hope to contribute to MA as much as I can. :) CaptFredricks (talk) 19:49, December 18, 2013 (UTC)